#history — vanity

[ciderbird]

academic bias is so funny because you’ll be reading about the same historical event and one person is like “Despite the troubles that befell his homeland and near constant criticism of the court King Blorbo remained strong in the face of adversity” and the other one is like “after letting his people carry the brunt of his cringefail decisions Blorbo the Shitface refused to listen to any reason and continued to be a warmongering piece of shit. Also he was ugly.”

[diioonysus]

oh they know they're that bitch

[eirene]

Carmen Dell’Orefice

1953, Vanity Fair Lingerie

Photographer: Mark Shaw

[lcs-scar]

favorite lil guy [more under the cut]

[ingravinoveritas]

I recently had this link shared with me by one of my lovely friends here in the fandom, and found it so compelling that I wanted to share it with all of you.

This is a recent article from Vanity Fair about Cary Grant and Randolph Scott, both iconic actors from the era we now call "Old Hollywood," and it details their extremely interesting--both by the standards of the era and today--relationship. It's a long read, but more than worth it.

For those who may not know, Cary Grant was an English-born American actor and iconic leading man, and Randolph Scott was an American actor most known for appearing in Westerns. Both men were married to women/had children at varying points in their lives, but by some accounts (and especially what is chronicled in this article), they were the loves of each other's lives, even though being openly queer was next to impossible at the time, and would've been looked at as a career-ending (and maybe even life-ending) move.

There also seem to be quite a few parallels between Cary and Randolph 90 years ago and Michael and David today. The two men actually lived together for a number of years, during which the press of the day chose to portray them as "just two fun-loving bachelors waiting to find the right gal," all while Grant in particular starred in films with queer-flavored undertones that were both bold and downright dangerous in the era of the Hays Code. They continued living together when Grant was first married to his first wife, Virginia Cherrill (and after they divorced), and fun fact: While Grant was married, Scott moved right next door...so they were, in fact, neighbors.

Here are a few other excerpts that very much reminded me of Michael and David, for your consideration. (FYI that "Archie Leach" was Cary Grant's birth name before he changed it to his stage name.) This first one calls to mind the Radio Times calling Michael and David a "handsome couple" on the night of the NTAs in 2021:

This next one of course made me think of Michael and David talking on David's podcast (skip to the 1:25 mark) in 2019 about hating photo shoots and how Michael flat-out refused to answer questions at one point and only got through it because of David:

And this last one features a quote from a close friend about Grant and Scott that nearly made my heart skip an entire beat. For reasons that will soon be very, very obvious:

(I mean...)

What is also remarkable about this article (though not necessarily in a good way) is the mention of how little has changed since Grant and Scott's time. How even today, any actor who comes out as any flavor of queer is immediately looked at differently, and how the fear of both professional and personal repercussions keeps people in the closet for so many reasons.

These were the parts of the article that stood out to me the most, but as always I would love to hear from my followers with your thoughts and takes on the parallels above or anything else that you find interesting...

[leatherandmossprints]

‘Vanity’ by Auguste Toulmouche (French, 1829–1890)

[philosophybits]

One cannot suppress a certain indignation when one sees men’s actions on the great world-stage and finds, beside the wisdom that appears here and there among individuals, everything in the large woven together from folly, childish vanity, even from childish malice and destructiveness. In the end, one does not know what to think of the human race, so conceited in its gifts.

Immanuel Kant, Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose

[luckydiorxoxo]

Josh O Connor photographed by Gordon von Steiner for Vanity Fair’s Hollywood Issue

[edwardian-girl-next-door]

~ Théobald Chartran, Candida, Marchioness of Tweeddale. Published in Vanity Fair on 1 March 1884.

via pixels.com

[fictionadventurer]

First Letter from Julia I. Sand to Chester A. Arthur

[1881 Aug 27]

To the Hon Chester A. Arthur.

The hours of Garfield's life are numbered--before this meets your eye, you may be President. The people are bowed in grief; but--do you realize it?--not so much because he is dying, as because you are his successor. What President ever entered office under circumstances so sad! The day he was shot, the thought rose in a thousand minds that you might be the instigator of the foul act. Is not that a humiliation which cuts deeper than any bullet can pierce? Your best friends said: "Arthur must resign--he cannot accept office, with such a suspicion resting upon him." And now your kindest opponents say: "Arthur will try to do right"--adding gloomily--"He won't succeed, though--making a man President cannot change him."

But making a man President can change him! At a time like this, if anything can, that can. Great emergencies awaken generous traits which have lain dormant half a life. If there is a spark of true nobility in you, now is the occasion to let it shine. Faith in your better nature forces me to write to you--but not to beg you to resign. Do what is more difficult and more brave. Reform! It is not the proof of highest goodness never to have done wrong--but it is a proof of it, sometime in one's career, to pause and ponder, to recognize the evil, to turn resolutely against it and devote the remainder of ones life to that only which is pure and exalted. Such revolutions of the soul are not common. No step towards them is easy. In the humdrum drift of daily life, they are impossible. But once in a while there comes a crisis which renders miracles feasible. The great tidal wave of sorrow which has rolled over the country, has swept you loose from your old moorings and set you on a mountain-top, alone. As President of the United States--made such by no election, but by a national calamity--you have no old associations, no personal friends, no political ties, you have only your duty to the people at large. You are free--free to be as able and as honorable as any man who ever filled the presidential chair.

Your past--you know best what it has been. You have lived for worldly things. Fairly or unfairly, you have won them. You are rich, powerful--tomorrow, perhaps, you will be President. And what is it all worth? Are you peaceful--are you happy? What if a few days hence the hand of the next unsatisfied ruffian should lay you low, and you should drag through months of weary suffering, in the White House, knowing that all over the land not a prayer was uttered in your behalf, not a tear shed, that the great American people was glad to be rid of you--would not worldly honors seem rather empty then?

Make such things impossible. Rise to the emergency. Disappoint our fears. Force the nation to have faith in you. Show from the first that you have none but the purest aims. It may be difficult at once to inspire confidence, but persevere. In time--when you have given reason for it--the country will love and trust you. If any man says, "With Arthur for President, Civil Service Reform is doomed," prove that Arthur can be its firmest champion. Do not thrust on the people politicians who have forfeited their respect--no matter how near they may be to you as personal friends. Do not remove any man from office unnecessarily. Appoint those only of marked ability and of sterling character. Such may not be abundant, but you will find them, if you seek them. You are far too clever to be easily deceived. In all your policy, have none but the highest motives. With the lamp of patriotism in your hand, your feet will not be likely to stumble.

Do you care for applause? Of course, you have had it, after a fashion. Perhaps from the dregs of the populace, inspired by the lowest of politicians. Possibly it pleased you at the time--it may have served some purpose that you solved then. But in the depths of your soul, do you not despise it? Would not one heart-felt "God bless you!" from the honest and true among your countrymen, be worth ten thousand times more? You can win such blessing, if you will.

Your name now is on the annals of history. You cannot slink back into obscurity, if you would. A hundred years hence, school boys will recite your name in the list of Presidents and tell of your administration. And what shall posterity say? It is for you to choose whether your record shall be written in black or in gold. For the sake of your country, for your own sake and for the sakes of all who have ever loved you, let it be pure and bright.

As one of the people over whom you are to be President, I make you this appeal. Perhaps you have received many similar. If not, still believe that this expresses the thoughts in many hearts, today--and do not give those who have had faith in you, cause for regret.

Yours Respectfully,

Julia I. Sand.

46 E. 74th st. New York.

Aug 27th 1881.

[thatshowthingstarted]

Unknown artist, “Memento Mori” (c. 100 BCE),

Mosaic, 18 1/2 x 41 1/2 inches (47 x 41.5 cm),

Held at the Naples National Archaeological Museum 

[regicidal-defenestration]

A good book is one that you come out of thinking "I want to make something that makes someone else feel the way this made me feel"

[eirene]

Vanity Fair cover.

Artist: Frank X. Leyendecker

November 1st, 1914

[a-sculpture-a-day]

Death, Hans Leinberger, c. 1519, pearwood, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien.

[the-golden-vanity]

Two Years Before The Mast reading update: Herman Melville really read the chapter where Hope decides Dana is his aikane and thought, "hmmmm... I can make this gayer," huh?

[jellysshitpoems]

Thoughts on the Chernobyl HBO miniseries (assuming you’ve watched it)? I really enjoyed it but I’ve heard that some big parts of it were inaccurate

Sorry this took awhile to get to I had classes all day

I really liked the show, a lot of it was fairly accurate, but it’s a tv show so of course some things were played up for dramas sake and shock value. The only part of it that really stuck out to me was the way they portrayed radiation poisoning, it’s not completely false I suppose… but its definitely not accurate lmao

It’s been awhile since I watched it, I prefer actual documentaries when it comes to real stories, but from what I remember they showed the firefighters skin as like translucent almost??? Which isn’t how that works. They also showed in one of the scenes a power plant worker bleeding immediately after holding a door open to which also isn’t accurate. Radiation sickness technically can cause bleeding like that, but it was way too soon for it to be happening. I could go on, but radiation sickness isn’t the most fun topic

The only thing I specifically disliked about the show was the public response, which isn’t really the fault of the creators. The amount of tourists doing stupid shit in the exclusion zone/Pripyat just makes me cringe. People moving untouched items, painting radioactive things ‘fun’ colours for cool photo ops, taking radioactive materials as souvenirs… awful. I even remember this one ‘sexy’ photo in a decontamination suit posted on instagram that was taken in the middle of the city. Its disrespectful. Not to mention A HEALTH HAZARD. But Chernobyl tourism is a different topic entirely.

Buy yeah, thinking back to the show radiation sickness is the only inaccuracy I can really remember, other then the miners getting naked in the tunnels, that didn’t happen, but it was funny so Ill give them that!